Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
1. There is no such thing as an anchor baby.
2. The Constitution says that these childen who were born in the United States are citizens.
3. I bet you didn't take an oath of allegiance when you were born.
All most newborns can say is a do do do da da da da, and that's pretty much it.
Anchors owe the same allegiance as their parents, which is currently being misinterpreted. Wong Kim Ark’s parent’s had legal residence and were processed when they entered the US and this was a huge reason the court ruled that they were under the jurisdiction of the US. Illegal immigrants children are given birthrights citizenship today and these illegal immigrants do not have legal residence and therefore are not under the jurisdiction of the US based on this ruling.
Congratulations. Your brilliant legal mind has just placed people with dual citizenship at birth outside US jurisdiction. No requirement to follow US law, pay US taxes etc. Diplomatic immunity in all but name, with removal from the US the only possible legal recourse. Now, would you like to reconsider?
Right. It was not in the SCOTUS footnote as you originally claimed (and then when back and poltroonishly tried to fix) and it cannot be found in any Supreme Court decision. It is instead in some other book that the court has referenced on a different issue... but not the one at hand. You may as well be offering us a reference to The Baseball Encyclopedia.
Too bad it is not an authoritative source on the issue under discussion. Birthers like to reference Vattel as a "credible source" a lot too... and yet the first two Amendments to the Constitution contradict him four times. An unrelated footnote on a different issue does not magically turn Bouve into the revealed word of God.
Its not an authoritative source? Yet Brennan used in his footnotes, hell you even pointed to Brennans use of Bouve in one of your comments.
I don't care about Vattel or birthers, neither have anything to do with my argument.
All the arguments against citizenship for some people born within US borders are baseless and unfounded. On the first page of this thread, I posted a link to the Constitution. It includes discussion about the circumstances causing the Amendment to be presented and mentioned major court cased that created precedence. Go read it. These babies are clearly citizens. While we're at it, let's get rid of this garbage about the citizenship of parents. It does not matter. Sometimes there is confusion because at times, the founders said "citizen" and sometimes they said "natural born citizen." It occurs in Article 2 where the qualifications for President are listed. (Some say this causes Alex Jones a great deal of restless nights.) At the time the Constitution was written, there were a lot of people living in America born before the Revolution, both born in the American colonies and born elsewhere but living in the Colonies at the time of the formation of the nation. Those two terms were used to clarify the qualification of Presidential candidates until such time as all candidates were born after the formation of the country, after such time, there was no difference between the two terms. If you go read the explanations of the 14th Amendment on the link I provided, it is abundantly clear that anyone born on US soil is a citizen unless the parents live in an Embassy or are at war with the US.
Now, it might be good parenting advice for the illegal aliens to take their children with them when they are deported, but it is not within the power of the Federal Government to force those citizen children to leave.
If you want a person born in America to be a citizen only of one or both parents are citizens, the proper thing to do is to contact your Congressman and ask him to introduce a new Amendment for a vote by the Congress to start the process of amending the Constitution. That's the only way to get what you want.
Sometimes there is confusion because at times, the founders said "citizen" and sometimes they said "natural born citizen." It occurs in Article 2 where the qualifications for President are listed. (Some say this causes Alex Jones a great deal of restless nights.) At the time the Constitution was written, there were a lot of people living in America born before the Revolution, both born in the American colonies and born elsewhere but living in the Colonies at the time of the formation of the nation. Those two terms were used to clarify the qualification of Presidential candidates until such time as all candidates were born after the formation of the country, after such time, there was no difference between the two terms. If you go read the explanations of the 14th Amendment on the link I provided, it is abundantly clear that anyone born on US soil is a citizen unless the parents live in an Embassy or are at war with the US.
well Citizens is an all encompassing term. There are those who become citizens by going through naturalization and they wanted to make that distinction when they said that to become President, you must be a natural born citizen.
Which shows that you have never read Wong Kim Ark, as it explains clearly what permanent domicile means.
You do, I hope realize, that by this statement you just completely lost your argument since it contradicts everything else you have stated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arus
there are no such thing as anchor babies. They are born citizens of that country (where that country allows citizenship by birth - jus soli). Anchor babies is a political turned churned up by racists and anti-immigration morons.
Sure glad you are the arbiter of who is racist and anti-immigrant morons.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
